Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

iluvtennis

(19,883 posts)
Fri Jan 10, 2020, 08:38 PM Jan 2020

George Conway & Neal Katyal: Have two impeachment trials - 2nd article first, 1st article next.


Kyle Griffin@kylegriffin1, 4 minutes
George Conway and Neal Katyal argue: "Holding the first article back, and letting the second go forward, would be a powerful and precise response to McConnell ... Trump would be forced to undergo two impeachment trials instead of one."





----
I like their thinking...but turtle mcConnell will never go for that.

16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
George Conway & Neal Katyal: Have two impeachment trials - 2nd article first, 1st article next. (Original Post) iluvtennis Jan 2020 OP
And in the meantime call witnesses Pantagruel Jan 2020 #1
agree about the third charge. nt spooky3 Jan 2020 #3
definitely NewJeffCT Jan 2020 #8
i fucking dislike g. Conway . i just had to ........ Kurt V. Jan 2020 #2
"but turtle mcConnell will never go for that. " Pantagruel Jan 2020 #4
that'd be great if process alows it. iluvtennis Jan 2020 #5
I'm for it!!!!! Talitha Jan 2020 #6
Interesting. Qutzupalotl Jan 2020 #7
Secret ballot won't happen. lastlib Jan 2020 #9
Let's see what comes out at trial, Qutzupalotl Jan 2020 #10
That isn't what the Constitution says. lastlib Jan 2020 #12
If Senators are furious and/or horrified at testimony, there won't be 20 Qutzupalotl Jan 2020 #13
If 81 senators aren't horrified by what they've already seen..... lastlib Jan 2020 #15
I often wonder how often George sleeps on the couch mnmoderatedem Jan 2020 #11
Reminds me of the old Churchill joke: lastlib Jan 2020 #14
It would be easier for them to... lame54 Jan 2020 #16
 

Pantagruel

(2,580 posts)
1. And in the meantime call witnesses
Fri Jan 10, 2020, 08:44 PM
Jan 2020

and subpoena documents on a third charge, obstruction as defined by the Mueller report.

NewJeffCT

(56,829 posts)
8. definitely
Fri Jan 10, 2020, 11:07 PM
Jan 2020

and, then a 4th if the tax returns/financial docs come out as well and show tax/financial fraud

 

Pantagruel

(2,580 posts)
4. "but turtle mcConnell will never go for that. "
Fri Jan 10, 2020, 08:47 PM
Jan 2020

Don't think he has a choice. It's Pelosi's prerogative what to send over I do believe.

Qutzupalotl

(14,337 posts)
7. Interesting.
Fri Jan 10, 2020, 10:52 PM
Jan 2020

It leaves the first charge open to the addition of new information for a Senate trial at a later date, and as they said, highlights the obstruction. These events happened in the House in plain view of everyone, not on a phone call in Kyiv with only a few witnesses. It *should* be hard to vote to acquit on this, given the Senate is being obstructed too. Maybe they like punishment. Or maybe a secret ballot will rid us of this lawless tyrant once and for all.

lastlib

(23,336 posts)
9. Secret ballot won't happen.
Sat Jan 11, 2020, 12:27 AM
Jan 2020

Article I, Sec. 5. One-fifth of the Senate can override secrecy and have the vote recorded. No way the losing side won't want it recorded.

Qutzupalotl

(14,337 posts)
10. Let's see what comes out at trial,
Sat Jan 11, 2020, 02:27 AM
Jan 2020

Last edited Sat Jan 11, 2020, 11:49 AM - Edit history (1)

assuming there are witnesses.

Republicans will never admit it publicly, but in private they grumble about Trump’s behavior and would be fine with dumping him for Pence — provided they suffer no negative consequences in the process.

If McConnell sees his majority in jeopardy due to Trump, he’d cut him loose in a heartbeat. He could, for instance, make the vote secret on a temporary basis or only revealed if there is a conviction, and pressure his members to go along. I’m not saying that’s likely, I’m saying never say never in politics.

lastlib

(23,336 posts)
12. That isn't what the Constitution says.
Sat Jan 11, 2020, 09:39 AM
Jan 2020

If twenty Senators want the vote recorded, it will be recorded. I don't see a Constitutional exception for impeachment. Not really any wiggle room on it.

Qutzupalotl

(14,337 posts)
13. If Senators are furious and/or horrified at testimony, there won't be 20
Sat Jan 11, 2020, 12:08 PM
Jan 2020

Last edited Sat Jan 11, 2020, 02:08 PM - Edit history (1)

who want to thwart removal by insisting on a recorded vote.

lastlib

(23,336 posts)
15. If 81 senators aren't horrified by what they've already seen.....
Sat Jan 11, 2020, 04:04 PM
Jan 2020

I can't imagine them seeing anything in a trial that WOULD horrify them......

lastlib

(23,336 posts)
14. Reminds me of the old Churchill joke:
Sat Jan 11, 2020, 04:01 PM
Jan 2020

Woman says to Sir Winston, "If you were my husband, I'd poison your drink." Churchill says, "Madam, if I was your husband, I'd drink it."

lame54

(35,331 posts)
16. It would be easier for them to...
Sat Jan 11, 2020, 04:52 PM
Jan 2020

Dismiss a single article

Which would diminish the sending of the second article

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»George Conway & Neal Katy...